I recently posted a few polls and posts regarding intact/circumcised status in order to get opinions/experiences/information from LPSG members in a non-debate fashion. Debates can be fun and definitely have a role to play in communication and education. However, they tend to become off topic often with personal attacks on the opposition. The opposing sides often do not consider what is being said.

On this highly controversial topic my goal was to get discussion on aspects of being circumcised and being intact based on the knowledge and experiences of LPSG members. In a way it was in itself a informal study on the subject. I do very much appreciate the input from those that contributed.

Below is a summary and an attempt to analyze the input. I also used a couple polls posted by Snozzle. The polls lead to some very interesting possible interpretations insight.

Foreskin Pleasure Vs Joy of Circumcised Sex

Intact Advantages-wearing condom feels not much different then without condom (assume due to gliding motion)-docking, very pleasurable experience-wanking is easier-girlfriend finds giving hand jobs easier (skin movement)-gliding motion (more friction on glans --- dont understand the more friction on glans since this know to reduce friction --- guessing this is due to more feeling due to interaction of skin and glans-oral stimulation with head hooded and tongue action-adds girth to back stroke to stimulate female (my input  also stimulates sensitive corona area of glans)-less abrasion & friction on glans preserving sensitivity-less friction and better able to sustain lube-glans covered when withdrawing

Ones I thought were missed -stimulation of the ridged band (tip), though indirectly alluded to in oral action with head hooded-stimulation of the frenulum area (directly and with skin movement pulling on frenulum

Circumcised Advantages-no or limited skin movement leading to more friction, increases stimulation of glans, inner skin and shaft skin-feels harder to partner-easy to clean / keep clean-less scent then intact-glans exposed throughout the sex act-less requirement to adjust in public (usually due to random exposure of glans that are normally covered)

Very little input on this thread and the responses did not address the elephant in the room. I debated on using polls Vs a straight thread. I would have needed several polls to get the information I was looking for and was trying to limit the number of posts on the subject  thus I opted for the straight thread. I now more clearly understand that although members are anonymous as they choose to be this is still a social forum based on avatars. This aspect is just too personal to discuss in an open forum. The poll option would have been the best option to ensure complete anonymousness.

Sensitivity Poll of Intact Men  If your glans became exposed while clothed you would:

1) Feels good, leave it exposed for extended time period _______10 ____ 27%2) Feels good at first but will adjust when it starts bother me ___10 ____ 27%3) At first feels ok but soon not so adjust asap _______________ 4 _____11%4) Feels uncomfortable right away  so adjust right away _______13_____35%

Overall, 73% of the intact men that responded would at some point adjust their foreskin to cover and protect their glans because it would become uncomfortable. I know when I am at the gym I see intact guys make this adjustment all of the time  guess it is because during workouts it is more likely to happen?? I assume it is more likely to happen with those that have shorter foreskins.

Most circumcised men (with the exception of restorers) walk around with their glans exposed to their clothing all of time. There is no issue with feeling uncomfortable. This is a strong indication that the penile glans of intact men is more sensitive then the penile glans of circumcised men.

Response rate was low but 58% of the respondents would be upset that there foreskin was suddenly gone. I didnt get any responses from the follow up question(s) asking to describe short & long term psychological affects. I didnt really expect to get much in the way of responses. My real goal here was to get intact men to really think about circumcision from a circumcised mans perspective (esp. RIC men).

The response rate was much higher in this poll compared to the Eek My Foreskin is Gone Poll  will discuss possible reasons for this after showing the results of Snozzles Polls. The response rate is high enough to have some statistical validity. It definitely shows a strong tendency that circumcised male LPSG members would rather be intact.

I asked circumcised men to describe how they would enjoy their new foreskin. The purpose of this was similar to the question asked of intact men that woke up to find their foreskins gone --- to really think about what it would be like.

There werent any real responses but hopefully it made people think, especially those pro-circ guys. Sometimes to really listen and understand what someone is saying to you it is good to really try and see the situation from the other persons point of view. I provided some explicit details from my view point to illustrate some of the differences between intact and circumcised sex that did not clearly come out in the previous posts. Of course there was some repetition.

The intact response is in agreement with the Eek My foreskin is Gone Poll; both show that the overwhelming majority of intact men would like to keep their foreskins (91% & 73.5%).

The circumcised response between the two polls is significantly different in percentage (80%, 60% like to be intact : 20%, 40% rather remain circumcised). However, in both cases the majority of circumcised men preferred to be intact.

Intact AnalysisThe response from the intact group remains similar with the majority of intact men being happy with their intact status. (Almost exact same numbers in the change/happy polls). The Eek my foreskin is gone poll did have a significantly higher disappointment rating. I think this is because there was not a choice involved. It is more dramatic and emotional to have your foreskin suddenly taken rather than have made decision yourself.

Cut AnalysisThe response from the circumcised group shows mixed results. In the 2006 Happy with your Circ Status poll the percentage of people that were unhappy to be cut was almost the same as percent there were glad to be cut. In the more recent Change your Circ Status Poll (push a button) the number of circumcised men that would choose to become intact increased from 42% to 60%. The number of men that would rather remain circumcised changed dropped slightly to 40%. The Eureka I am now intact poll showed a whopping 80% of circumcised responders being glad to have become intact.

What does this mean?2006 Happy poll Vs 2010 Change your status poll 42% - 60% - possible reason:Circumcised men have become more aware the true nature and the benefits of being intact. The Am I the only one that likes being circumcised debate thread has being going since Oct 2007. It is possible that even just that has influenced the LPSG membership.

What about the 80% of circumcised guys being happy to suddenly have a foreskin? Why is this number so much higher? Could it related to the 92% of intact guys that would be disappointed to have their foreskin disappear, to the fact that most intact guys go through life with their foreskins and dont have them removed (unless medically necessary).

Bottom line the numbers clearly show that a significant number of circumcised men are not happy with circumcised status as per 3 polls

2006 Happy Poll____________ 42.2% cut and wish I wasnt2010 Change Poll____________60% prefer to push button to have foreskin2010 Eureka Intact Poll_______80% would be happy to be suddenly intact

That is an obviously a significant percentage of men who do not like the decision that was decided for them when they were infants.

The LPSG website supports membership from all over the world and thus has a very large intact population. I am not sure the percentage of intact Vs Cut but would guess that it would be at least equal if not greater in the number of intact men. If this is the case it would be expected that there would be a closer response rate for both groups.

Why are there consistently such a greater number of circumcised men responding to these types of polls than intact men? Why is it that the circumcision debate is more vigorously debated amongst circumcised men than with intact men?

I believe the answer is twofold. One, as above overall, for informed circumcised men the greatest percentage prefer to be intact. Second, circumcised men whether they prefer to be intact or not are psychologically affected by their circumcision and lack of control over it (talking about RIC here). Those that prefer to be intact want to express this desire. Those that prefer to be circumcised either really prefer this or are subconsciously being very defensive to protect their egos. There is at least a percentage of those that indicate they prefer to be circumcised that actually dont.

It is very obvious that a significant percentage of the &#8220;informed&#8217; circumcised as infants population (at least significantly greater than 50%) are not satisfied with their circumcision status. This alone is reason to put an end to routine infant circumcision.

Someone in &#8220;Am I the only one that likes to be circumcised&#8221; debate thread said this is a &#8220;stupid topic&#8221;. The topic isn&#8217;t stupid since it is a contemporary societal issue, but the fact it is still being debated is. The answer is obvious. By far the greatest majority of intact men prefer to be intact and the greatest majority of &#8220;informed&#8221; circumcised men prefer to be intact.

Why is RIC still being practiced then? Why can&#8217;t we agree on the obvious majority consensus and give our future children the choice they deserve?

I was given the choice. I would give that same choice to my sons. If they want to be circumcised, they can get it done themselves. I enjoy being uncircumcised. Never had a problem with my foreskin and neither has anyone else. Most of my friends have been uncut. They seem quite happy with their foreskins too. I do know a couple guys who have been circumcised as adults and not one of them recommend having it done.

Gold Member

I don't support the idea of hacking away a worthless piece of skin which tends to get caught in zippers, the gaps between teeth, on certain jewelry that women invest in and place inside their gloves or their mouths, sucked relentlessly and with force into a vacuum cleaner hose (making it comically long and dragging on the floor), caught on the cheese grater when grating cheese in the nude, or snagged by the edge of a fork when scratching an itch, or yanked on by a curious stranger at the house of detention, and searched under by guards at said house of detention as they check for contraband and weapons (I was 23 when they did that search, 2 of them-my first holding by the Feds) and of course the skin hides the main object of power, the magic wand- I mean, what if all that you had was a foreskin and no wand under it? Sort of useless.:biggrin1:

All that said, if my son were named Sapien or dxjnorto I might just have it done, so they'd be able to grow up with a purpose and a focus. Of course, I would not personally circumcise the boy, I'd hire a doctor or that morning glory woman(?) who used to be here, to take care of it:smile:.

Nah, I couldn't even put them there, even knowing it would mean a different career choice for them. Sorry guys. Ciircumcision is best saved as a choice for when the male is old enough to opt for himself on what he wants.

Gold Member

I would not personally circumcise the boy, I'd hire a doctor or that morning glory woman(?) who used to be here, to take care of it:smile:.
.

Click to expand...

oh jesus fucking christ! u had to bring her up ??? LOL i used to have nightmares about that woman roaming the country side breaking into houses and chewing the foreskins off baby boys with her ferengi teeth.

Gold Member

oh jesus fucking christ! u had to bring her up ??? LOL i used to have nightmares about that woman roaming the country side breaking into houses and chewing the foreskins off baby boys with her ferengi teeth.

she was psychotically deranged.

Click to expand...

I almost mentioned the teeth tearing method:biggrin1:.
(and I think they pshychotically deranged part, might be a bit mild for describing her)

Gold Member

I almost mentioned the teeth tearing method:biggrin1:.
(and I think they pshychotically deranged part, might be a bit mild for describing her)

Click to expand...

yeah i had mixed feelings when they banned her from the site, at least when she was a member, she spent ALOT of time posting, now we don't know where she is or how she redirected that energy. i shudder to think what she might be up to now.

Well, seeing as how I'll never have a child, boy or girl, my sentiments are just that - sentiments. I'm not circumcised and I wouldn't have a valid reason to require a child to undergo that as well.

But if you did vote yes for non-religious reason (which is another thing I simply cannot understand - why a supreme being would demand a tip) then why not have their tonsils and appendix removed while they're in the nursery?

Gold Member

No I did not. As as white middle class American mom I made an unpopular decision but I didn't really care much what people thought. Esp. reading the thoughts about it here on the boards it just makes me even more sure I did the right thing. If he really hates it, he can get it done when he's 18.